I don't find that funny at all, if by funny you mean something along the lines of philosophically inconsistent.
I actually expect that sort of behavior and find it 'funny' when people don't display it. Not only for Jungian duality of man reasons, but because those folks complaining about regulation mean regulation that stops them from doing what they want to do. Any regulation they can use to further their interests they approve of. They aren't basing their arguments on an abstract concept of how the economy should work they are basing it on what gets them the most.
It is no different from the bulk of the anti-patent/trademark/copyright crowd here. They produce nothing so they've no concern for that side of the equation, and care only for what benefits them.
No it isn't, that is how we got locksets that stay locked, ones that relock on a timer, ones that can remind you if you've left them unlocked.
It is why my vehicle dings at me if I leave the keys in the ignition (or the lights on).
If I forget to lock my office door and someone steals my stapler, no big deal really. If I forget to lock the front door of the nursery and someone steals all the babies, big deal. So we consider the human element in designing the locks for those two places, despite the fact that any reasonably decent lock and key set would 'secure' them equally.
I'm not fan of using Wikipedia as a reference source, but if you don't know what "common knowledge" is, you shouldn't be bogging down a discussion by throwing out "citation needed" for common knowledge.
No, it is a flaw of lock and key security because the human who operates the system is as much a part of it as the lock and the key. Though you might not blame the lock or key for that specific incident it is still a problem.
This is not to say that it is convenient or even possible to design a flawless security system, only that there is progress to be made in keeping one's eyes open as to the ways they can go wrong.
Day traders and speculators in the employ of major banks and trading houses unfortunately make the market. Aided by the unending stupidities of cost accounting.
One can only hope seeing a goliath like Apple make an obvious pro-throughput move will convince a few others.
It wasn't a mistake, it was a purposeful altering of a product prior to selling it as 'new' without telling anyone.
The claim is that they didn't want to sell what is essentially a coupon for a competitor's store, and I don't blame them, but they could very well have been up front about that prior to the sale and included this 'deal' in its place then instead of now.
Or we can start expecting the people who have chosen to specialize their careers in preventing this type of thing, to ensure that a spreadsheet cannot exploit a bug in animation software to gain root access to the entire network.
Cost accounting may prevent either solution from being possible, who knows.
You are paraphrasing the last line of the article. And it isn't like everyone working on computer security isn't well aware, especially a company that sells a product designed to mitigate user silliness like lousy password.
What is more striking to me is that a bug in some minor piece of convenience software is enough, despite efforts at sandboxing and UAC type prompts and ACLs and firewalls and sniffing and all that, to eventually compromise the most important asset a RSA had.
I haven't either, but every time I walk past the Apple store here it is slam full of people, plenty of whom walk out having bought something.
Apple makes a laptop, a netbook, a tablet, a couple of different music players, and a phone. That is it more or less, so I can't figure what those people are all in there doing. But never the less they are in there.
It isn't taste, so much as the mass of people don't really need to do anything particularly special with a computer. Or any other thing really.
You might, and I write might because most people here are complete posers, need your computer to do something particularly taxing or specialized. In the MS-DOS days people mostly needed to correct a paper they wrote without using up all their correction tape, or maintain a basic spreadsheet, or sort a list. No one needed a multi user UNIX machine for that nor did it makes sense to pay for one. MS-DOS and Windows built on top of it was adequate and cheap.
I'm geeky about rifles. ANd having been a USMC 8541 my tastes run toward quality. When I walk into a rifle shop and see stacks of plastic stocked lowest bidder sticks I think about how people have no taste. But in reality some guy who shoots a deer a year at 75 yards has no need for a McMillan handle and would never ask enough of it appreciate the difference.
I remeber working at my university's CS help desk, deleting email after email of usenet abuse reports. There was some masterful trolling going on in those days and I was happy to have a position to not only be audience to it, but to help it continue.
To think future generations will be denied that by oppressive governments makes me sad.
I don't interpret as above, but I'm not getting any deep insights about humanity out of it either. If the point is that some magazine mistakes small ideas for big ones, that isn't exactly new information. You might as well complain that Rolling Stone is taking Bono seriously and passing over other deep thinkers. Both are doing it on purpose, because they are entertainment publications selling easily digested gloss to people who want to know rather than think at that specific point in time (see, I did RTFA). But that doesn't mean they only want to know rather than think, all the time.
The author picks a tiny handful of huge thinkers from the course of human history and pretends like that sort of thought is past us. He proceeds under the misconception that the masses were somehow reading about these people and their ideas as they happened, like Keynes was a pop culture icon.
Regardless, how does arguing which is better in the presence of of online alternatives cost Linux the desktop? Google Docs and Prezi both work fine whether the user is running Linux or Windows or BDS or OSX, or has LibreOffice installed or not or whatever else.
The premise here seems flawed.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't find that funny at all, if by funny you mean something along the lines of philosophically inconsistent.
I actually expect that sort of behavior and find it 'funny' when people don't display it. Not only for Jungian duality of man reasons, but because those folks complaining about regulation mean regulation that stops them from doing what they want to do. Any regulation they can use to further their interests they approve of. They aren't basing their arguments on an abstract concept of how the economy should work they are basing it on what gets them the most.
It is no different from the bulk of the anti-patent/trademark/copyright crowd here. They produce nothing so they've no concern for that side of the equation, and care only for what benefits them.
Possibly the OP means Preview?
Also I think, when mentioning Word, he is comparing the advantages of sending a traditional fax to emailing the .doc(x).
Take a deep breath man.
No it isn't, that is how we got locksets that stay locked, ones that relock on a timer, ones that can remind you if you've left them unlocked. It is why my vehicle dings at me if I leave the keys in the ignition (or the lights on). If I forget to lock my office door and someone steals my stapler, no big deal really. If I forget to lock the front door of the nursery and someone steals all the babies, big deal. So we consider the human element in designing the locks for those two places, despite the fact that any reasonably decent lock and key set would 'secure' them equally.
I'm not fan of using Wikipedia as a reference source, but if you don't know what "common knowledge" is, you shouldn't be bogging down a discussion by throwing out "citation needed" for common knowledge.
A bit circular, on purpose.
Probably better than asking for internet links would be for you to go down to your local PD and ask to file a complaint against an officer.
Circular, because that is how I like it.
I obviously don't know for sure, but I strongly suspect if everyone had pulled the lever for McCain your last line would remain the same.
Or if it had been Clinton in Obama's place, or any of the republicans who's names I don't recall.
Who would they hire as replacments?
I'm not an idiot, but I don't want to be a cop. You don't. I think the job attracts that sort so maybe it should be eliminated...
I look at it as exactly that, sans the ability to make traditional phone calls.
Which is why I haven't bought one yet.
No, it is a flaw of lock and key security because the human who operates the system is as much a part of it as the lock and the key. Though you might not blame the lock or key for that specific incident it is still a problem.
This is not to say that it is convenient or even possible to design a flawless security system, only that there is progress to be made in keeping one's eyes open as to the ways they can go wrong.
The same is true of hippo proof body armor.
OP's point is that he feel the risk of comet catching is overblown by ninnies, similar to the situation with bike helmets.
A power plant on Mars...necessary human development if we intend on colonizing space
Which is we they want to fly a nuclear plant up there.
we'd better learn about getting along and maximizing our resources so that we can continue to thrive as a species
This is the exact problem nuclear solves, better than any other current technology. Which is why it is the best option for powering a moonbase.
Eric S Raymond (and Taco) after this...
Nope, not this time.
Day traders and speculators in the employ of major banks and trading houses unfortunately make the market. Aided by the unending stupidities of cost accounting.
One can only hope seeing a goliath like Apple make an obvious pro-throughput move will convince a few others.
It wasn't a mistake, it was a purposeful altering of a product prior to selling it as 'new' without telling anyone.
The claim is that they didn't want to sell what is essentially a coupon for a competitor's store, and I don't blame them, but they could very well have been up front about that prior to the sale and included this 'deal' in its place then instead of now.
It is annoying to me and I don't even game.
Or we can start expecting the people who have chosen to specialize their careers in preventing this type of thing, to ensure that a spreadsheet cannot exploit a bug in animation software to gain root access to the entire network.
Cost accounting may prevent either solution from being possible, who knows.
You are paraphrasing the last line of the article. And it isn't like everyone working on computer security isn't well aware, especially a company that sells a product designed to mitigate user silliness like lousy password.
What is more striking to me is that a bug in some minor piece of convenience software is enough, despite efforts at sandboxing and UAC type prompts and ACLs and firewalls and sniffing and all that, to eventually compromise the most important asset a RSA had.
Looking closer, Hirvonen found that the file seemed to match RSA's description in possible every way.
I assumed this was a poorly translated phishing article and immediately closed my browser window and reinstalled Windows.
I haven't either, but every time I walk past the Apple store here it is slam full of people, plenty of whom walk out having bought something.
Apple makes a laptop, a netbook, a tablet, a couple of different music players, and a phone. That is it more or less, so I can't figure what those people are all in there doing. But never the less they are in there.
It isn't taste, so much as the mass of people don't really need to do anything particularly special with a computer. Or any other thing really.
You might, and I write might because most people here are complete posers, need your computer to do something particularly taxing or specialized. In the MS-DOS days people mostly needed to correct a paper they wrote without using up all their correction tape, or maintain a basic spreadsheet, or sort a list. No one needed a multi user UNIX machine for that nor did it makes sense to pay for one. MS-DOS and Windows built on top of it was adequate and cheap.
I'm geeky about rifles. ANd having been a USMC 8541 my tastes run toward quality. When I walk into a rifle shop and see stacks of plastic stocked lowest bidder sticks I think about how people have no taste. But in reality some guy who shoots a deer a year at 75 yards has no need for a McMillan handle and would never ask enough of it appreciate the difference.
Where did the companies get the billion dollars?
I remeber working at my university's CS help desk, deleting email after email of usenet abuse reports. There was some masterful trolling going on in those days and I was happy to have a position to not only be audience to it, but to help it continue.
To think future generations will be denied that by oppressive governments makes me sad.
I don't interpret as above, but I'm not getting any deep insights about humanity out of it either. If the point is that some magazine mistakes small ideas for big ones, that isn't exactly new information. You might as well complain that Rolling Stone is taking Bono seriously and passing over other deep thinkers. Both are doing it on purpose, because they are entertainment publications selling easily digested gloss to people who want to know rather than think at that specific point in time (see, I did RTFA). But that doesn't mean they only want to know rather than think, all the time.
The author picks a tiny handful of huge thinkers from the course of human history and pretends like that sort of thought is past us. He proceeds under the misconception that the masses were somehow reading about these people and their ideas as they happened, like Keynes was a pop culture icon.
Probably if you become too big a fanboy of anyone other than yourself, you are going to be disappointed.
If it is negligible, why go through the trouble to change it?
Regardless, how does arguing which is better in the presence of of online alternatives cost Linux the desktop? Google Docs and Prezi both work fine whether the user is running Linux or Windows or BDS or OSX, or has LibreOffice installed or not or whatever else. The premise here seems flawed.